A player that placed himself on the self exclusion list for New Jersey online casinos learned a tough lesson. The New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement forced the player to forfeit $15,526. The player was banned from all New Jersey online casinos before playing at Resorts. It is unknown how the player gained access to the site or how the casino or regulators discovered it.
The New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement states that the complaint was filed on April 4, 2017. The winnings were held by NYX Group, which provides the online casino software for Resorts. The site and player were given notice that a hearing could be requested within 15 days to dispute the forfeiture order.
Neither the online casino or the player requested one. It appears that the player did not respond at all. This caused the New Jersey Division of Gaming Enforcement to find that the player admitted fault and that the funds should be forfeited. Resorts did not object to the action so the $15,526 was turned over to state regulators. The order was dated May 9.
Playing after self exclusion always ends poorly
There is a reason why self exclusion exists. It is a way for problem gamblers to opt out as part of addiction recovery. Most online gambling sites offer this feature. Regulated ones, like those in New Jersey, are required to offer this feature. It typically covers every gaming site in the jurisdiction if done through regulators or the specific site if only done in the software. Players that opt into it and subsequently play are making a huge risk.
Online casino sites will not pay winnings if a player that has opted out wins. There may even be a policy that requires the site to keep the money. Players that decide to stop online gambling using this method must be certain that this is the right move and stick by it. This player, only referred to as “ST” in the complaint, learned this the hard way.
It’s likely that the player did not use his own information when creating the account. Identity software used by the casino would have discovered this quickly. The player probably used a family member or friend’s information. This may have tipped off the person whose identity was used. It may have required the actual name on the account’s personal information to process the large withdrawal transaction, which would have made it impossible to ever receive the winnings.
ST is now out the money that he lost before opting out, as well as a massive win that would have probably reversed losses leading up to the opt out. Don’t make the same mistake as ST. If you opt out of an online gaming site or jurisdiction, stay away for as long as it applies.